Bob Murphy Critques “Denying Evolution”

This is the kind of professional tone ID needs to have a louder voice. What I think happens is that the experts on both sides of the debate assume that being totally fair (and I mean so fair it might seem reve redundant to some) and nice doesn't pay off. I think it does--and it really helps laypeople get a total picture. My only critique of his article is that he faults Johnson for saying that Feynman is an extremely fair scientist on philosophical grounds (laughing at theistic proofs). It's clear from any of Feynman's books that he doesn't really like philosophy at all (and I personally think he never really got the point of it). He's also been quoted, according to Henry F. Schaefer III in his 2003 book, as saying, eight years before receiving his Noble, that a scientist can be a Christian in a perfectly consistent way. Ben Z

He does seem to do a good job critiquing the book. My only critique of his argument is when he discussed the flawed design argument. The argument does not just say that we are an imperfect design so why would someone design us this way as Murphy treats it. The argument says that we have the exact design flaws that one would expect from a creature that had ancestors that were not bi-pedal and had smaller heads. I do not think that the oversimplification was intentional though. I especially liked his hypothetical scenario at the end where he envisioned what evolutionists would say if human fossils were found next to a dinosaurs. ftrp11